The literature article titled, "revision of failed resurfacing hemiarthroplasty: midterm results, survival, and group comparison" written by pieter c.Geervliet, md, mike houtveen, md, inger n.Sierevelt, md, cornelis p.J.Visser, md, phd, and arthur van noort, md, phd published by orthopedics 2019 was reviewed.The article's purpose was to report the clinical functional outcomes of revision from uncemented global cap resurfacing prosthesis (depuy).Data was compiled from 36 women and 12 men who received global cap resurfacing hemiarthroplasty between january 2007 and december 2009.Eleven of these patients required revision.Article reports the caps were uncemented and cement manufacturer is not identified for revision implants.The global caps resurfacing were revised to global ap (tsa), delta xtend (rsa) or to another non-depuy shoulder arthroplasty.No adverse events are noted post revision.Depuy product: global cap humeral head.Reasons for revision of global cap (qty 11 total revisions): pain.Glenoid erosion.Loss of function (related to range of motion).Cuff arthropathy.Subluxations.Arthrofibrosis.Infection.
|
Product complaint # (b)(4).Investigation summary : no device associated with this report was received for examination.A worldwide lot specific complaint database search, or device history record (dhr) review, was not possible because the required lot number was not provided.The information received will be retained for potential series investigations if triggered by trend analysis, post market surveillance, or other events within the quality system.Device history lot : the product investigation found no evidence suspecting an error in the manufacturing or material that would be a contributing factor in the reported allegation(s).Where the lot code was provided, a manufacturing records evaluation (mre) was not performed.
|